The Little Thread Which Grew - the Apollo '73 to Everything But

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

You're known by the company you keep. Bob Adams is $cio-cultist to the core pushing $cio front groups infiltrating our society with Elcon's sick twisted agenda spreading "acceptable truths" commonly called lies at every opportunity. What an odd thing to defend that speaks volumes about you more than you realize.

What is your source of knowledge as regards Bob Adams being friends with him, Of course you did not answer either of my questions. Why do you read this thread? then Why do you post here. I don't know Bob Adams, who he is or what he does, but say he is a spokesman for CoS, and say I am friends with someone who knows him and then someone is a friend of mine, etc. then what is supposed to happen?

Are we all therefore written off as evil and damaged goods? If you really had some info that you think we on this thread should know, you should write a post telling about this person and give references and links to back up what you are saying and then urge us to read your sources. That would be a reasonable action a person might take.

Your style is to just sort of mumble some scio terms under your breath and infer people are no good because they don't react to your semi incoherent mumblings.

Here is what your posts sound like to me, "JP is BFFF with Aflec at CMO, Not ok w/me but i'm an SP so what do I no, but U shld know better than to trust ,n sp. bcause you.re knwn by the compnay you keep."

What in the heck is a person supposed to do with a post like that. It has no references or links to back it up, Mainly it just tries to make someone wrong even though they really don't even know what you are talking about.
Lakey

 

[MrNobody]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I never correlated hits to replies except in a very rudimentary fashion. I might figure that a thread with 50,000 hits would have more replies than a thread with 5000 hits. That is about as far as I would take the correlation. I was only correlating pages with views. That correlation was proven to be valid by moderator 3 He said that a thread could choose how many replies they wanted on a page. Maybe the default option is ten. We have always had 10 replies posted on every page since our inception. We never choose that number but 2has been constant since inception.

No. While 10 posts per page may or may not be true for you, it surely isn't for me. <posts per page> is a user-definable variable and I've set mine to <20 posts per page> or so years ago. Others may use different values, making any "stats" based on <number of pages> completely useless.

See the response I just wrote to Moderator 3 above. I read what he said and fully got it.

I highly doubt that you fully got it.

One consolation is that we know for sure that we are the largest thread because we are the thread that would be hackers are choosing to swarm to.

Please define the term "hackers". Hint: Legitimate Search engine bots, who are visiting and indexing each and every post in every publically available thread, do certainly not fall under my definition of "hackers".

I guess if some other thread began having more action than us, then the hackers would gravitate over to that thread but that probably will not happen while this thread is still active. Another similar point is that we started small and passed all the other threads to get to be the largest, passing the DC thread at 162,000 views around 2011.

LOL, what kind of argumentation is that? Every thread starts with one meager 1st post. Yes, it's true, this thread has picked up more "stats" over the years than any other thread here on ESMB, but does that really mean anything? Maybe to you it does, but to me it certainly doesn't, because I see no other thread here on ESMB where so many misconceptions, faulty assumptions and other undesirables run rampant.

IMO, the Apollo thread isn't even the place where faulty ideas come to die, it's the place where ideas, which were already dead on arrival, are put on life support under the irrational assumption that "something worth to be saved" might be in there.

My favorite example: The A=432 Hz discussion - an idea certainly dead-on-arrival, but it had to come here to be discussed to death a few more times. Stuff like this might be pleasant to you because it adds to the most important things in your life, which, sadly, whether you want to admit it or not, are your "stats", but let's be honest: Discussing an idea to death which was already dead before it even came into existence, is pointless, since there never ever was any "meat on that bone" to begin with. There never ever even was any bone. But still, it added to the "stats" of this thread, and there's even another stat you can add to your list: <minutes of time wasted on a dead-on-arrival-topic per user>.

If I were willing to add up the number-of-hours-I-wasted on this thread alone, I'd have to leave ESMB alltogether because of severe, serious clinical depression.

<snip> However, as I told moderator 3 above, that is not important. What is important is just making good quality posts without being crucified while doing it and having fun, learning things, keeping your mental acuity sharp and meeting new people while posting here.

Please define "quality post".

If all that good stuff is in, frankly, who gives a hoot what the stats are. I don't really care that much, really I don't. Lakey may care but Gary does not really give a rat's ass about the thread's stats. Lakey is putting on a little show, just to test the direction of the wind.
Lakey

Sigh...

 

[Free Being Me]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I don't know who Bob Adams is. But I do know Carmelo enough to know he is riding his own horse. I won't attempt to take over the reins mid trot. Also, I can't live in a negative nasty world thinking the worst of people.

Bob Adams and $cientology are negative and nasty, the cult hurts people daily. Why would Carmelo/C02 be buddies with this dude? It's beyond odd. Comparably if someone here was best buds with the director of osa or with slappy that would merit a wtf. So, wtf.

Bob Adams - Church of Scientology International Vice-President -- April 2014
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ology-International-Vice-President-April-2014

Since Bob Adams' name has come up on other threads/posts here @ ESMB, I did a simple Google search to try and learn if he is still an active member of Co$.

Here's a link that popped up near the top of Google's simple search results page - it provides a short, but informative, historical sketch: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~./dst/Stop-Narconon/Bob-Adams/index.html

The very short video clip below was filmed in September 2012 in/near Sandy Springs, GA. (A Zoning Board meeting re: Narconon.)
Bob Adams introduces himself as, "...Vice-President of the Church of Scientology International".
Does this video prove Bob Adams is Vice-President of CSI in 2014? Nope; but then I only did a simple Google search.

[video=youtube;co5B2sXW7-w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co5B2sXW7-w[/video]

Away from Google, there are quite a few posts here @ ESMB that identify Bob Adams as being an executive staff member of Co$; some mention his specific assigned department as OSA, either working in the PR or Legal section therein.
I've read most of the posts but can't seem to find any that link directly to an original document that says definitively: Bob Adams = OSA.
YMMV...and I do encourage others here to search and find more/more current info on this individual so we'll all be better informed.

There is one 'leaked' email purportedly sent by Bob Adams prior to his visit to the Melbourne, Australia org on/near November 28, 2009.
The email is 'signed': "Much Love, Bob Adams, Vice President, Church of Scientology International".
It can be found at this ESMB post: http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...t-coming-to-Oz&p=335255&viewfull=1#post335255

After reading quite a bit about the management structure of Co$, it doesn't seem as if the title of VP is given to just anyone.
Further, given the Co$ policy NOT to permit on-camera interviews with their spokesreps in this post-Tommy Davis world,
having Bob Adams appear at a public meeting on behalf of Narconon with cameras rolling, identifying himself as VP of CSI,
implies he has the confidence & full support of upper-echelon Co$ management.

So.

If anyone now or in future obtains current info on Bob Adams and his work for and/or on behalf of Co$/CSI, this thread is a good place to post it.

JB

(I'll pull-up other threads with "Bob Adams" in the title and add them in a few minutes.)

 

[Free Being Me]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

It has no references or links to back it up >snip<

Let there be quotes. :wink2:

OSA INT Staff List (click on the url for all of the contextual posts, very interesting)
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthread.php?5370-OSA-INT-Staff-List

Bob Adams and kathy O are really nice people, no ifs ands or buts

In a Jan 14, 08 issue of The New Yorker, there is an article “Chateau Scientology” in which Bob Adams is quoted:

Bob Adams, a former N.F.L. tight end who is the vice-president of the Church of Scientology International, said that the R.P.F.—which is sometimes characterized by critics as a punishment for Church staff members who get out of line—is a volunteer program for self-improvement. “They get frequent breaks, eight hours of sleep, and three healthy meals,” he said. “The principal part is auditing, but the physical activity is very extrovertive for the individual and is found to be very therapeutic in itself.” Besides, he said, the R.P.F. furnished only a portion of the labor for Celebrity Centre and worked alongside professional contractors.

Many of my close friends opted not to look for themselves when the massive declares and off-loads were underway in the early 80s. They cowered to the "party line."

So disappointed that Bob Adams seems to be among them. Not the same man I knew back then.


http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/01/14/080114fa_fact_goodyear

I don't think anyone who ever played football, at the pro level, "cowers."

Bob is in the same information cloaked area as Kirstie Alley. In the 80s period, he did a doubt formula, on his own. His take on things was to stay.
He has been protected from the seamier sides of the Co$, because of his quasi celebrity status. For the last decade he has been on radio stations across America talking about the harm of steroids.

If you are ex GO, then you know how easy it is to lie for the good of the cause. I know I don't want to be held accountable for any fact checking errors I may have made. Ask Hillary about Bosnia or Al Gore about the internet.

In short, I think he does a lot of good, by anyone's definition of a man. He may be operating in the dark regarding the real evils. My observation has been that those who left were tech trained, and those who stayed were public, for the most part. Bob is really still a public kind of staff member. He doesn't need them. He is a selfless volunteer.

Adams must have gotten hit in the head a few too many times as well. He is not very bright. He has a looong history of footbullets, and WOULD be on the RPF if he were not a "quasi-celebrity".

Yes, Bob is really stupid (perhaps compared to Albert Einstein).

Bob had over a decade's employment in the NFL. The NFL doesn't keep poor players around because they like them.

Then he was a general contractor building spec houses in the wealthiest neighborhoods of the United States.

As a software designer (with his own company) he merged into running several successful software companies.

For time off, he spent a couple of years in China running Applied Scholastics. He put that program into many (Mainland) Chinese colleges.

For years he's talked on radio stations across America against the use of steroids.

Anybody can flub when speaking live, just ask President Bush.

So, as I see it, you quoted someone (BFG) giving gossip, which I have specific knowledge that at least part of it is completely false. (I read the original post. There is a large inaccuracy or two in it.)

You call Bob, "not very bright." How bright are you? Have you even one accomplishment that rivals one of Bob's many?

 

[Maria Cuervo]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Bob Adams and $cientology are negative and nasty, the cult hurts people daily. Why would Carmelo/C02 be buddies with this dude? It's beyond odd. Comparably if someone here was best buds with the director of osa or with slappy that would merit a wtf. So, wtf.

Bob Adams - Church of Scientology International Vice-President -- April 2014
http://www.forum.exscn.net/showthre...ology-International-Vice-President-April-2014

Rinse and repeat. The point is I am not going to think the worst of someone on your say so, based on an association that I am not familiar with, based on a further assumption that Bob Adams whoever he is matches up to some cartoon label just because you say so. I don't know him but I do know Carmelo and that's enough for me.

 

[Free Being Me]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Rinse and repeat. The point is I am not going to think the worst of someone on your say so, based on an association that I am not familiar with, based on a further assumption that Bob Adams whoever he is matches up to some cartoon label just because you say so. I don't know him but I do know Carmelo and that's enough for me.

No one said you had to think the worst of anyone, that's a straw man and poor one at that. I posted quotes-dox on Bob Adams and Carmelo. All of a sudden you can't read English? lol. I'm definitely not going to hip hip hooray stats (cringe) nor Carmelo the pro-elcon tehkie BFF of $cio-cult spokeshole Bob Adams for David Miscavige.

The last time this was brought here was Carmelo's/C02's reply avoiding an answer.

none of your F'n' business.

I am on very good terms with your landlord. Check my Linked In.

Why not ask AnonMary? She likes to publicly "out" private conversations.

BTW: I do like to play, and I respect you for all that you have done, and are doing, but a games condition is a games condition.

[video=youtube;-pJz0KcQm8g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pJz0KcQm8g[/video]

and PPS:

you are derailing a thread about sex. I'd rather talk about sex than Scientology or Anti Scientology any day of the week.

and and PPPS

fuck you.

Was that clear enough?

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

No one said you had to think the worst of anyone, that's a straw man and poor one at that. I posted quotes-dox on Bob Adams and Carmelo. All of a sudden you can't read English? lol. I'm definitely not going to hip hip hooray stats (cringe) nor Carmelo the pro-elcon tehkie BFF of $cio-cult spokeshole Bob Adams for David Miscavige.

The last time this was brought here was Carmelo's/C02's reply avoiding an answer.

Can you please cut the insults? They add nothing to your post or the discussion.

 

[Free Being Me]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Can you please cut the insults? They add nothing to your post or the discussion.

That was a rhetorical question. The last time you didn't get a rhetorical question it went on for pages absurdly accusing me of being "abusive" for a similar question. lol.

Rhetorical question
Noun: 1) a question asked solely to produce an effect or to make an assertion and not to elicit a reply, as “What is so rare as a day in June?”

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

That was a rhetorical question.

The last time you didn't get a rhetorical question it went on for pages absurdly accusing me of being "abusive" for a similar question.

Rhetorical question
Noun: 1) a question asked solely to produce an effect or to make an assertion and not to elicit a reply, as “What is so rare as a day in June?”

FBM, there's a simple answer to this. Go out into the real world, away from ESMB or any other internet forum, and ask rhetorical questions like that of people - "Are you blind?" as you said to me in the post you just referred to (the one I apparently didn't get), or "Don't you understand English?" (as you've just done to Maria) and see whether or not the person you're making them to, or anyone else present, finds them offensive. Unless your country's vastly different from mine, I think you'll discover and in quick time that they do.

 

[Free Being Me]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

FBM, there's a simple answer to this. Go out into the real world, away from ESMB or any other internet forum, and ask "rhetorical" questions like that of people - "Are you blind?" as you said to me in the post you just referred to, or "Don't you understand English?" (as you've just done to Maria) and see whether or not the person you're making them to, or anyone else present, finds them offensive. Unless your country's vastly different from mine, I think you'll discover and in quick time that they do.

Interesting. Take my harmless rhetorical questions interpreting them literally to "invent my crimes." You made a fool of yourself the last time you pulled this trying to "handle" me over the FIFY fiasco. Remember reason is the first victim of strong emotion and that's all your fallaciously doing, an empty contrived appeal to emotion. How about you knock off the hyperbole because it doesn't work well for you.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Interesting. Take my harmless rhetorical questions interpreting them literally to "invent my crimes." You made a fool of yourself the last time you pulled this trying to "handle" me over the FIFY fiasco. Remember reason is the first victim of strong emotion and that's all your fallaciously doing, an empty contrived appeal to emotion. How about you knock off the hyperbole because it doesn't work well for you.

I don't particularly care about making a fool of myself (as if I've never done that before, online or off). We can all live and learn if we are big enough to swallow our pride.

I do care that by what I still see as your unkind comment to Maria, which you decline to retract, you're adding to the burden of someone who's already had more than enough abuse on this forum. BTW, the FIFY fiasco is water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Free Being Me]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I don't particularly care about making a fool of myself (as if I've never done that before, online or off). We can all live and learn if we are big enough to swallow our pride.

I do care that by what I still see as an your unkind comment to Maria, which you refuse to retract, you're adding to the burden of someone who's already had more than enough abuse already on this forum. BTW, the FIFY fiasco is water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned.

I find it hard you believe you don't grasp a literary device that isn't literal, it's rhetorically figurative and only you are reading into it as insults because you choose to where no insults were given. Reposted:

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I find it hard you believe you don't grasp a literary device that isn't literal, it's rhetorically figurative and only you are reading into it as insults because you choose to where no insults were given.

Believe what you want, it doesn't matter. If you think I'm an idiot, you're free to either ignore my posts, to put me on ignore, or to point out my idiocies (from your perspective) to whomsoever may give a toss about them or whom you may feel could be wrongly influenced by them. As we say over here, fill your boots.

Look, we've both said our piece on this and we clearly don't agree, so let's agree to differ. I don't propose to say any more about it; let others be the judge now if they wish.

 

[Free Being Me]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

Believe what you want, it doesn't matter. If you think I'm an idiot, you're free to either ignore my posts or to point out my idiocies (from your perspective) to whomsoever may give a toss about them or whom you may feel could be wrongly influenced by them. As we say over here, fill your boots.

Look, we've both said our piece on this and we clearly don't agree, so let's agree to differ. I don't propose to say any more about it; let others be the judge now if they wish.

Listen CS, you falsely accuse me of being abusive with adhoms, tell me to leave the board because you don't understand the English language well enough to comprehend posts that have no insults in them. This is the second time you've done this without so much as an apology. Go instigate your silliness on someone that will be intimidated by it because I'm not. Enough is enough and this convo is going nowhere.

 

[Cat's Squirrel]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

FBM: if I did tell you to leave the board, in that earlier conversation we had, I'm sorry; I should not have done, it wasn't my place to do so. I've never claimed to be perfect and unfortunately I do have a temper.

As for this "rhetorical question" business, I promise that I will give the matter some thought and maybe discuss it with others here, by pm if not on the thread.

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I find it hard you believe you don't grasp a literary device that isn't literal, it's rhetorically figurative and only you are reading into it as insults because you choose to where no insults were given. Reposted:


U talk about a rectal question but U told us you R an SP. True, Fify is not insulting, How is rectal aid connected to a literary device which even isn't literal? Ur point about insults is well taken. What it boils down to is that you insist several times that U R SP sends up red flag & scares me. That literary devitce U recommend sounds good, where can I buy one? BTW. I.m looking for real literary devitce not the kind that realy isnt literal. Thank U.: Newly posted:

 

[Churchill]

Re: Unusual Befellows - This is really an odd mix.

I like guns and shoot for fun and I doubt that I could be relied upon to put a round through an elephants ass at 20 meters. LOL

Maybe a small elephant, but I suspect you are being overly modest, Mick.

I just happened to re-watch Clint Eastwood's American Sniper, based on the book by Chris Kyle and

FWIW your post brought to mind the line, "Aim small, miss small."


And, as an aside, I've also observed that FBM's posts are most always right on target as well!

 

[lkwdblds]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

No. While 10 posts per page may or may not be true for you, it surely isn't for me. <posts per page> is a user-definable variable and I've set mine to <20 posts per page> or so years ago. Others may use different values, making any "stats" based on <number of pages> completely useless.



I highly doubt that you fully got it.



Please define the term "hackers". Hint: Legitimate Search engine bots, who are visiting and indexing each and every post in every publically available thread, do certainly not fall under my definition of "hackers".



LOL, what kind of argumentation is that? Every thread starts with one meager 1st post. Yes, it's true, this thread has picked up more "stats" over the years than any other thread here on ESMB, but does that really mean anything? Maybe to you it does, but to me it certainly doesn't, because I see no other thread here on ESMB where so many misconceptions, faulty assumptions and other undesirables run rampant.

Of course it means something. Just reread Moderator 3's explanation back a couple of posts to find out what it means. Unfortunately, your ability to see clearly is in question here, not the content of this thread. What is the saying, "Fifty million Frenchmen can't be wrong." We've been going strongly on ESMB for 5 1/2 years. If what you suggest above were true, this thread would have died off years ago but instead it still remains the most widely read thread on ESMB.

IMO, the Apollo thread isn't even the place where faulty ideas come to die, it's the place where ideas, which were already dead on arrival, are put on life support under the irrational assumption that "something worth to be saved" might be in there.

If that is the case, then why do you keep reading it? The only way someone could hold thoughts of that nature and still read it is if they want to bring to the attention of the readers of this thread that the thread is bogus. You have given that procedure your best shot again and again over the years and yet the thread grows in spite of your efforts. You need to rethink your purpose for reading the thread. Read it if you like it, ignore it if you don't but reading it to bash it hasn't worked for you. Why keep up an unsuccessful action if it isn't working??

My favorite example: The A=432 Hz discussion - an idea certainly dead-on-arrival, but it had to come here to be discussed to death a few more times. Stuff like this might be pleasant to you because it adds to the most important things in your life, which, sadly, whether you want to admit it or not, are your "stats", but let's be honest: Discussing an idea to death which was already dead before it even came into existence, is pointless, since there never ever was any "meat on that bone" to begin with. There never ever even was any bone. But still, it added to the "stats" of this thread, and there's even another stat you can add to your list: <minutes of time wasted on a dead-on-arrival-topic per user>.

A=432 Hz music is certainly not dead on arrival. Look on youtube; an enormous of music videos are there, many of them newer videos. If you study musical history, you see that the music of both Bach's time and Mozart's time were based on 432 Hz. At a later date in Italy, 432 became the official standard. Getting into the damn 3rd Reich again, Frigging Goebbles had something to do with going with A=440 music. It had to do with sirens, air raid warning sirens, ambulance sirens, all the various sirens which are heard in a nation that planned to be constantly at war. The sirens are more grating at A=440 than at A=432 and that is what Goebbles wanted from German sirens and German music. The more spiritual and soothing tones from A=432 were not desire by the 3rd Reich and probably not by other governments as well. Most people can't tell much difference anyway, so the governments of Earth went for 440.

To hear the difference, you have to play the same song over back to back to really notice the difference. Even then, only those with a keen musical ear may be able to distinguish the difference. I remember well how I was attacked and discredited for even bringing up the subject. I know who attacked me and fortunately most of them quit posting here but you chose to stay. Really, that issue is not a major issue and if someone disagrees with 432 and thinks it is a hoax, that would not seem to be the type of issue used to discredit a person who heard a difference. Yet that was exactly what happened. I was battered from pillar to post over such an innocuous issue. Just that fact alone showed me who my enemies were.

If I were willing to add up the number-of-hours-I-wasted on this thread alone, I'd have to leave ESMB alltogether because of severe, serious clinical depression.



Please define "quality post".



Sigh...

Why subject yourself to such turmoil? It is silly to spend so many wasted hours on this thread alone when doing so is causing you clinical depression!! Why do it? I'm not pointing a gun at you. For your own sake, man, if this thread depresses you, just stop reading it. I am not your friend but an acquaintance who cares about all people, even my detractors. Here are two things which I recommend you do - sort of as a friend, even though we are not friends.

#1 Change your screen name from Mr Nobody to Mr. Somebody!! In the name you have chosen, you are putting yourself down. For God's sake, man, take on a more upbeat name!!!
#2 Stop reading the Apollo thread for a significant length of time. Give it at least 3 months and then see if you feel better. Maybe you could return then with a more upbeat name or probably you should not return. You would have to be the judge of that, yourself, ditto for changing you name.
Lakey

 

[Gizmo]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

I like to practice generosity with my friends. If CO2 is friends with someone, I trust his judgment as to that choice. I don't tell you what to do either.

I do giggle at attempts to censor who is friends with friends with whom.

One thing I did learn while in scn ( those dark days I chose to put in my life ) is that the cult was not only very fucking interested in who my friends were but also demanded to CONTROL who I was & was NOT friends with.

If the cult had some upset with Joe Blow then, by God - ( not really, just by Ron's order ) - I had to be also be upset with Joe Blow & shun Joes Blow.

What was the upset? Didn't matter. None of my business but by you-know-whose -order I had to toe the orders of the boss. ( Nowadays ain't nobody boss of me but that digresses )

Anyway, ain't none of my business who is friends with whom. Just I have no business having my long nose in somebody elses decision of who their friends are.

Christ, just last night an invited guest to our home who happens to be an Xscn was trying to take me to task for having a very dear friend who is an active cult member !

For me - and just for me as others freely do as they please - I respect this freedom of religious choice as a persons right.

I have friends who are :
- Christian all the way from JWs & Holy Rollers all the way to Unitarian & Unity
-Catholic
Jewish - lotsa ranges there too
- Protestant
- Muslim
- &, yes, even card carrying scientologists.

I have no say in the religion ( or cult ) somebody else chooses for themselves.

This who-is-friends-with-whom thing is something I feel the same way about: choose your friends.

Sheesh. We even get some of that crap on ESMB of the third grade " if you are going to have that one as a friend then I'm going to pout & let you know I do not like your choice of your friends !

Well, I guess if it matters then one has to start cutting people out of their life.

PS - if "stats " really don't matter then why the fuck are they kept & regarded as Holy ?

PPS - I'm really an odd duck as I get 40 posts per page on this thread ( for me ) which comes to about 540.

PPPS - Judging the "quality" is any given post seems a fun way to go.

PPPPS - But please Dear God Almighty never ever let any of facts sway a firmly held belief !

 

[Gizmo]

Re: The old days - Aboard the Apollo - 1973

You're known by the company you keep. Bob Adams is $cio-cultist to the core pushing $cio front groups infiltrating our society with Elcon's sick twisted agenda spreading "acceptable truths" commonly called lies at every opportunity. What an odd thing to defend that speaks volumes about you more than you realize.

I am so willing for my life choices to speak - as they should ! - volumes about me.
That IS me.
How could it be any other way than TO speak volumes about me ?

Well, just put me down in the category of I know - and consider good friends - some people still very much in the cult of scn that are devoting their life to doing the very things I stand so deeply strongly against now.

In the interest of complete disclosure I - at one time - stood exactly where they stand now & did exactly the same kind of stuff they are now doing !

I could name a long list of names of people that I thought were good people that now I think they are mis-guided ( as I once was ).

When I decided to leave the cult I was really pleased to know some people I could go to RIGHT THEN.

Today I stand ready for my friends who are still in to come to me RIGHT NOW & have a welcoming place as they get slammed with declared & disconnection as they feel their world is collapsing on them.

So, by anyone's standards if they feel I'm a bad person for associating - and being friends - with people of my choosing then by all means do whatever suits you in regards to me.

And oh-HELL-yes there are what I consider cringe worthy people in ( & out ) of our fav cult, but, isn't it a person right to choose for themselves who they associate with as well as who they shun ?



I mean, OMG, somebody married my X !
How could ANY person do that ! .... but.............they did......................LOL !